Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14838 of 2021 Applicant :- Arvind And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to set-aside the entire proceeding of C.N.R. No. UPJB- 040354552020 (State Vs. Arvind Kumar & Others) arising out of cognizance order dated 06.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/A.C.J.M.-I, Amroha over the charge-sheet No. 184 of 2020 dated 01.09.2020 in Case Crime No. 149 of 2020 U/s 498-A, 323, 294, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S., Amroha Dehat, District, Amroha.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated. There is nothing on record to show that applicants are involved in commission of this offence.
Per-contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the contention of learned counsel for the applicants.
In M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra and Others, 2020 SCC Online SC 850, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held:
"iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the rarest of rare case (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule."
Following other authorities can be cited on the aforesaid point:
R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604.
This Court cannot embark upon enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness of the statements of victim and other witnesses. Thus, these are disputed questions of fact which can be adjudged upon in the trial only.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that learned trial court be directed to dispose of the bail application of the applicants in light of the Judgement of this Court passed in Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 15699 of 2016.
Learned trial court is expected to abide by the judgement of Brahm Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others while considering the bail application of the applicants.
With this direction, the present Application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 A. Mandhani